Phil Robertson was suspended from the A&E show "Duck Dynasty" after expressing controversial views on civil rights and gays in a magazine interview.

Margaret Croft / The News-Star/Associated Press

I don't care what Phil Robertson thinks about gay people. I don't care what Phil Robertson thinks about bananas, sports cars, American politics, religion or even ducks.

I do understand why fans of his show might care, though I find some reactions for and against Robertson's remarks shrill, self-serving, sanctimonious, childish and over the top. Nonetheless, I'm not enough of a prude to claim I'm disinterested in what the celebrities I do follow have to say about things. For me, duck dude isn't one of them. Even if he were, his comments wouldn't have surprised me, and neither did the reactions that ensued, including A&E's decision to suspend the duck dude indefinitely.

I don't care about most of what Robertson told GQ in an article the magazine's cover aptly refers to as “Shooting the sh*t with the dudes of 'Duck Dynasty.' ” But a few things stood out as I read the piece:

-- Robertson's comments about gay people were taken out of context in most of the public debate I have seen or heard on blogs, among TV pundits, on Facebook and in newspaper opinion columns.

For instance, duck dude didn't limit his criticism to gay people. He paraphrases, as the magazine describes it, a passage from Corinthians this way: “Don't be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers — they won't inherit the kingdom of God.”

Robertson acknowledges that he was once one of the outcasts, born again after overcoming a long struggle with booze and pills. And he says it's not for him to judge what happens to people like his former self. “We never ever judge someone on who's going to heaven, hell. That's the Almighty's job. We just love 'em, give 'em the good news about Jesus — whether they're homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort 'em out later.”

-- I agree with four of the words Robertson strung together: “We just love 'em.” I also like the part about not judging others, though I think judging — or prejudging — others is exactly what he does in a lot of his comments to the magazine.

I'm no Bible scholar, but I am a Catholic, and I've been fortunate enough to have a good bit of exposure to the good book during my schooling, in church and in life. If I had to distill Jesus Christ's teachings into a simple message, it is this: Love each other. The Bible tells me Jesus fraternized with a lot of the social outcasts of his day — tax collectors, lepers, prostitutes. He even took in an apostle named Judas, a guy Jesus knew would eventually betray him and lead him to an agonizing death by crucifixion. Let's see, what was Jesus trying to teach us here?

I am not gay, but I don't care if you or anyone else is. And, despite what some of my fellow Catholics and Christians profess, I don't believe homosexuality is a sin or condemns a person to hell. I do, however, believe many of the swindlers, terrorists and greedy people Robertson calls out as sinners could plead a decent case for admission to Hades. And I'm puzzled that the same moral indignation many of Robertson's supporters have expressed against gay people has not been dispensed similarly to those others, along with the adulterers, the slanderers and the drunkards he says the Bible condemns. One of life's mysteries, I suppose.

-- Despite what Sarah Palin, Gov. Bobby Jindal and others have said, this is not about the First Amendment. Duck dude was free to say anything he wanted, and the First Amendment guarantees that he faces no consequence — from government. Not from A&E. And not from people who disagree with him.

-- In the end, almost everyone wins from this. Jindal, Palin and their conservative lot rally their bases. And so do the gay-rights groups and others who oppose Robertson's remarks. A&E and Robertson win major publicity for what's left of a reality show that even Robertson admits has a limited shelf life. “Let's face it,” he told GQ, “three, four, five years, we're out of here. You know what I'm saying? It's a TV show. This thing ain't gonna last forever. No way.”

I suspect some of you are asking two questions:

-- Keith, if you don't care what Phil Robertson says, why are you writing about this at all? Well, because I know a lot of you care, and publishing information and opinions on topics readers care and talk about is one of the things we do here.

-- What are you doing reading GQ? Honestly, it's not just this duck dude article; I don't care about much of anything I read in GQ. I do like a deal, though, and GQ offered a great one on my subscription, which was almost free. So, what the heck, now I can say I got my money's worth.

Courier and Daily Comet Executive Editor Keith Magill can be reached at 857-2201 or keith.magill@houmatoday.com.

<p>I've never seen “Duck Dynasty.” I do read GQ, though I hadn't read the interview with the reality TV show's patriarch, Phil Robertson, until Saturday, before I wrote what I am about to tell you.</p><p>I don't care what Phil Robertson thinks about gay people. I don't care what Phil Robertson thinks about bananas, sports cars, American politics, religion or even ducks.</p><p>I do understand why fans of his show might care, though I find some reactions for and against Robertson's remarks shrill, self-serving, sanctimonious, childish and over the top. Nonetheless, I'm not enough of a prude to claim I'm disinterested in what the celebrities I do follow have to say about things. For me, duck dude isn't one of them. Even if he were, his comments wouldn't have surprised me, and neither did the reactions that ensued, including A&E's decision to suspend the duck dude indefinitely.</p><p>I don't care about most of what Robertson told GQ in an article the magazine's cover aptly refers to as “Shooting the sh*t with the dudes of 'Duck Dynasty.' ” But a few things stood out as I read the piece:</p><p>-- Robertson's comments about gay people were taken out of context in most of the public debate I have seen or heard on blogs, among TV pundits, on Facebook and in newspaper opinion columns.</p><p>For instance, duck dude didn't limit his criticism to gay people. He paraphrases, as the magazine describes it, a passage from Corinthians this way: “Don't be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers — they won't inherit the kingdom of God.”</p><p>Robertson acknowledges that he was once one of the outcasts, born again after overcoming a long struggle with booze and pills. And he says it's not for him to judge what happens to people like his former self. “We never ever judge someone on who's going to heaven, hell. That's the Almighty's job. We just love 'em, give 'em the good news about Jesus — whether they're homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort 'em out later.”</p><p>-- I agree with four of the words Robertson strung together: “We just love 'em.” I also like the part about not judging others, though I think judging — or prejudging — others is exactly what he does in a lot of his comments to the magazine.</p><p>I'm no Bible scholar, but I am a Catholic, and I've been fortunate enough to have a good bit of exposure to the good book during my schooling, in church and in life. If I had to distill Jesus Christ's teachings into a simple message, it is this: Love each other. The Bible tells me Jesus fraternized with a lot of the social outcasts of his day — tax collectors, lepers, prostitutes. He even took in an apostle named Judas, a guy Jesus knew would eventually betray him and lead him to an agonizing death by crucifixion. Let's see, what was Jesus trying to teach us here?</p><p>I am not gay, but I don't care if you or anyone else is. And, despite what some of my fellow Catholics and Christians profess, I don't believe homosexuality is a sin or condemns a person to hell. I do, however, believe many of the swindlers, terrorists and greedy people Robertson calls out as sinners could plead a decent case for admission to Hades. And I'm puzzled that the same moral indignation many of Robertson's supporters have expressed against gay people has not been dispensed similarly to those others, along with the adulterers, the slanderers and the drunkards he says the Bible condemns. One of life's mysteries, I suppose.</p><p>-- Despite what Sarah Palin, Gov. Bobby Jindal and others have said, this is not about the First Amendment. Duck dude was free to say anything he wanted, and the First Amendment guarantees that he faces no consequence — from government. Not from A&E. And not from people who disagree with him.</p><p>-- In the end, almost everyone wins from this. Jindal, Palin and their conservative lot rally their bases. And so do the gay-rights groups and others who oppose Robertson's remarks. A&E and Robertson win major publicity for what's left of a reality show that even Robertson admits has a limited shelf life. “Let's face it,” he told GQ, “three, four, five years, we're out of here. You know what I'm saying? It's a TV show. This thing ain't gonna last forever. No way.”</p><p>I suspect some of you are asking two questions:</p><p>-- Keith, if you don't care what Phil Robertson says, why are you writing about this at all? Well, because I know a lot of you care, and publishing information and opinions on topics readers care and talk about is one of the things we do here.</p><p>-- What are you doing reading GQ? Honestly, it's not just this duck dude article; I don't care about much of anything I read in GQ. I do like a deal, though, and GQ offered a great one on my subscription, which was almost free. So, what the heck, now I can say I got my money's worth.</p><p>Courier and Daily Comet Executive Editor Keith Magill can be reached at 857-2201 or keith.magill@houmatoday.com.</p>